I simply used KBB trade value, which is what the dealers here use. Don't believe me? You can log on yourself and play with it. That said, you do mirror what I said. It's totally the bottom of its class, I was wrong by 0.2%. It's literally the worst.

You said bottom of it's class. The list I posted .. it's at the bottom of the best in class. You know there's a lot more in the class then those 5. Jeep? Kia? Hyundai? Chevy?

Because this is not imortant to me. You can't fathom that? First off this is the first new car I've ever bought, so resale has never before been a thought in my head. And it's not now. I don't even understand why that would be important to someone. Looks are #1 for me. Followed by fun to drive. Then utility. And reliability. That's all I care about. I should by a car I don't love as much just because in 5 years I might get an extra grand for my CRV? Dumb ass reason to buy a car IMO.

Sigs are visible only in your first post on a page. To change your thread display preferences, click here and enable 'Always Show Signature'.

Because this is not imortant to me. You can't fathom that? First off this is the first new car I've ever bought, so resale has never before been a thought in my head. And it's not now. I don't even understand why that would be important to someone. Looks are #1 for me. Followed by fun to drive. Then utility. And reliability. That's all I care about. I should by a car I don't love as much just because in 5 years I might get an extra grand for my CRV? Dumb ass reason to buy a car IMO.

I can't relate to you. You bought a CUV and your top to reasons are "Looks and fun to drive". So yeah, you're right. I cannot fathom your processes, nor will I try.

Thinking of buying a CX-5 but I have some questions first.

There're differences between Canadian CX-5 GS and US CX-5 Touring. For 2018, US CX-5 Touring comes with more features than 2017, including 19" wheels and most i-ActivSense tech standard.

What we had questions on:

-Storage Space/Cargo room: To me, this is the biggest sticking point.

Most reviews have mentioned it, CX-5 has smaller cargo room and storage space. But coming from Toyota Matrix you shouldn't be worried too much about it.

-Backseat/Family:

Back seat room is a little smaller than others, and some have mentioned the front driver and passenger would have to move their seat a little forward to accommodate a rear-facing child seat right behind them. The other thing if you care is during the NHTSA safety test, rear passenger protection performed a little disappointed which caused 2017/2018 CX-5 NHTSA safety ratings stays at 4-star overall.

-Cylinder deactivation: It sounds very good in theory.

To me it sounds not good even in theory. Mazda added this feature without any prior notice to its 2018 SkyActiv-G 2.5L lineup. Nothing new on technology but it carries bad reputation for long-term reliability since 1980's when GM introduced it. Honda also uses the cylinder deactivation in its V6 but they settled a class action lawsuit for its 2010~2013 3.5L V6 with Variable Cylinder Management, which has been experiencing engine misfire, excessive oil burning and premature spark plug fouling issues.

Not sure on 2018, but we haven't spilled anything on infotainment system controls for our 2016 CX-5. I only saw one report here so far for such incident.

-Infotainment system Part 2:

Slowness? No AA and ACP? These're something you've to live with it. But Mazda's Connect is good enough for me and many others.

-Oomph:

Yeah CX-5 with current SA-G 2.5L is just a compact CUV for most families. Acceleration is still among the best in the same class. You can't compare it with your Toyota Matrix.

-Winter:

Mazda i-Activ AWD is an excellent system for winter driving but it comes with some fuel economy penalty.

-Winter Part 2:

In very cold winter such as in Canada many new 2nd-gen CX-5 owners had experienced severe vibration issues during startup and driving. Mazda claimed it's caused by new hydraulic engine mounts and the revised mounts should be on the way.

-Servicing/Costs of Maintenance:

This's true that the maintenance cost on Mazda CX-5 is a little higher with more expensive synthetic oil and relative shorter maintenance interval. But it shouldn't be a concern as long as the vehicle is reliable.

-Reliability: With the recent news of the airbag recall, our enthusiasm was a bit tempered. Consumer reports rated Mazda around 12th out of 27** (right around Nissan, which I'm not sure is great considering the garbage reputation I always hear about Nissan and their CVT transmission in particular). Do you think the rating is accurate? Have you had more or less problems with the car than what you were expecting?

Discard the airbag recall as it only affects a few CX-5's. As for reliability rating from Consumer Reports I believe it's legit as it's based on the experience of thousands of subscribers. When I purchased our 2016 CX-5 the reliability rating on Mazda from CR is #4 for 2 consecutive years and that's one of the reasons we bought it at the time. The drop on reliability rating would be my concern but this rating can change for 2018 and future MYs.

-Accessories:

Most people would get excellent cargo cover. I personally would also get fog lights although they may not be useful for foggy condition.

Sorry for the long post, I just want to be thorough with the questions.

shadonoz in the previous post said the best, no car will be perfect for you in every way and we'll have to settle for some compromises. You definitely have done plenty of research, and still the final decision is on you.

Does it try to use a different cylinder each time? My understanding of other failures with this tech is when same cylinder(s) are always used in the deactivation algorithm.

It doesn't, and you're right. GM, after years of fixed 4-cylinder deactivation on V8, only now introduces new and improved Skip Fire system by Delphi. The engine can run on 1 cylinder, if needed, up to 8. Different cylinders are fired next ignition cycle.
No, Mazda uses traditional technology of shutting down two outside cylinders when conditions are met, through controllable hydraulic lash adjusters.

Thanks for the info as I didn't aware GM has just introduced "new-and-improved" Skip Fire system by Delphi. It sounded better as it disables different cylinders in turn. But it also increases complexity further for very minimum fuel economy gain. Cylinder deactivation is something I really don't want.

And then there are those of us who are sure that, just like everything else, the technology has improved to the point where the problems of the past have been worked out and there is zero reason to believe Mazda or Ford will have issues with this tech.

Sigs are visible only in your first post on a page. To change your thread display preferences, click here and enable 'Always Show Signature'.

Thanks! Perhaps it will be different with Mazda.....I personally wouldn't be comfortable with it. Too many friends and family with issues with this tech from other automakers.

I agree. But I don't see anything would be different from Mazda's cylinder deactivation system based on its released documents. In fact I aborted my plan getting a new 2018 CX-5 because of sudden-introduced cylinder deactivation as I always keep my vehicle for as long as I can.

Like others have mentioned, waiting to see 2019 Toyota RAV4 with new 203/206hp naturally-aspirated、direct- and port-injected Dynamic Force 2.5L I4 and Direct Shift-8AT 8-speed automatic. Fuel efficiency should be the best among all compact CUVs, with always the best reliability rating to boot.

And then there are those of us who are sure that, just like everything else, the technology has improved to the point where the problems of the past have been worked out and there is zero reason to believe Mazda or Ford will have issues with this tech.

If you're referring to cylinder deactivation, what is the new tech Mazda has implemented to overcome the drawbacks on CD? It would take several years to show the symptom. Honda's class-action lawsuit involved as late as 2013 model year. Even GM is giving up the old design on CD and using more dynamic design as mentioned above.

Hell if I know. I don't know anything about cylinder deactivation. Never said I did. I believe in technology advancing. I just have a very hard time believing Mazda is willing to risk the CX-5, the best selling Mazda world wide, on something so "risky". If the CX-5 tanks, Mazda tanks. If they weren't dead set sure about it, it wouldn't be here today. That's good enough for me.
I'm an optimist, brother. Always have been.

Sigs are visible only in your first post on a page. To change your thread display preferences, click here and enable 'Always Show Signature'.

I can't relate to you. You bought a CUV and your top to reasons are "Looks and fun to drive". So yeah, you're right. I cannot fathom your processes, nor will I try.

And I can't relate to you "I'll just buy the cheapest thing I can find that's reliable". Never in my life have I said that about a car. Nor will I ever. Life's too short to drive an appliance. But I respect your choice.
My issue with you is your attitude that you're right. You know it all. You're inability to understand everyone is different. Our motto around here, thanks to our esteemed Aussie friend: each to thier own.
"Fun to drive" means different things to different people.
I do appreciate that you bring a different perspective to the group. I just wish you'd use "IMO" more often.

Sigs are visible only in your first post on a page. To change your thread display preferences, click here and enable 'Always Show Signature'.

Wife's out of town. I could be driving this all weekend. 40 more hp. 50 more ft lbs. Turbo. Convertible. The most nimble steering feel of any car I've ever owned. It hasn't moved since she left. I love it. It's fun to drive, too. But given the choice I always pick the CX-5.
What does that tell you, op?

Sigs are visible only in your first post on a page. To change your thread display preferences, click here and enable 'Always Show Signature'.

My issue with you is your attitude that you're right. You know it all. You're inability to understand everyone is different. Our motto around here, thanks to our esteemed Aussie friend: each to thier own. ...
I do appreciate that you bring a different perspective to the group. I just wish you'd use "IMO" more often.

Ahem. Brings to mind one of my dear departed mother's old sayings: "that's the pot calling the kettle black".